Martin Landa wrote: > They could be fixed by splitting the message [1] or using named > convention [2].
[1] is the wrong thing to do (and that particular example should be reverted). It eliminates the warning without addressing the issue which caused the warning. Warnings provide clues as to how the code can be improved. They shouldn't be silenced by making the code worse. If it isn't possible to eliminate a warning without degrading the code, then the warning should just be allowed to happen. In Python code, using named substitutions is the right approach; it's guaranteed to be supported by any version of Python which will work with GRASS. With C code, not all platforms support numbered specifications, but I don't think that xgettext warns about that. -- Glynn Clements <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
